Unified IPAM prefix usage vs custom prefix field

[lumarel]

Hi there I'm trying to understand why it was chosen to basically use a string property for the prefix and next hop (but mainly prefix) properties instead of linking to objects from the IPAM IP-address and prefix tables 🙂
(speaking mostly for static routed as this is what I was looking for)

Why this seems important to me at all is because on the one hand you have to manage these IPs/prefixes twice. (and after poking around it seems to me as if the EIGRP part already uses the prefixes)

Thanks! Lukas

[alehaa]

I found that peculiar as well, so I suggested in #88 that we switch to using IPAM IP addresses for static routes as well.